Modelphilia wrote:
Your commercial work is good overall. In the first row though, there are too many images of the print dress. I'd say that if you can darken the distracting background a little bit on the first image, that would be my choice of the three.

The nudes, while deserving of kudos for being original, might be best in a separate portfolio (under a pseudonym?). Alternately, the first two rows in that section could be removed, as could the final row of the "Fun" album.

Hope this helps somehow.

Thank you, you're right about the dress pictures. It was tugging at me but I couldn't put a finger on it.

Would you be able to elaborate on why you think the nudes should be put in a separate portfolio under a pseudonym (and why the two rows in particular)? I actually felt the images are quite nice

Quentin Studios wrote:
I like to show a variety in my work to attract more variety of jobs/ calls, but I understand that the portfolio may seem unfocused for some people.
. . .
Would you be able to elaborate on why you think the nudes should be put in a separate portfolio under a pseudonym (and why the two rows in particular)? I actually felt the images are quite nice

Sure, Your original post really says it. The commercial-style work is very different from the rest. I wasn't meaning my suggestion on the nudes to be a criticism of their quality. I agree that many are quite nice, and also original in their conception. I was just taking note of the wide difference between the commercial and the fine-art/playful ones.

The pseudonym suggestion was only meant to take care of the fact that you've apparently already used your real name for your overall portfolio, and since the rest of the work is so different, I thought that would be a way to allow you to keep your real name associated only with the commercial work (or v/v).

I am sympathetic to the idea of having a lot of variety in your portfolio, but commercial work, if you are striving to get paid for it, should probably be presented separately. After all, the nude work won't get you any commercial jobs, plus nude models will, for the most part, be uninterested in commercial work, while it is largely v/v for fashion models.

Speaking of putting a finger on things: I am now more able to pick out a quality in the commercial work that you may want to pay some attention to. In most of the commercial-style images, the expressions on the models' faces are very dead, as if they've been waiting around too long for you to snap the shutter. It could also be due to the model's personality, but it's your job as the director to bring something more interesting and engaging out of them.

Look at the difference between those (say in the first row) and the first one in the third row. The latter model looks alive, involved, and engaging, while too many of the others look very remote and emotionless. Directing models, and being spontaneous with them, takes a lot of practice, and a lot of psychology-in-action. That doesn't come easily to everyone, so that might be an area to work on as time goes along.

Just keep on shooting, and developing your talents and interests, and it will all come together for you.

Best of luck!

GSG Photography Studio wrote:
Next I would get rid of the shots with the feet cut off in photos

Hands, too.

Modelphilia wrote:

Sure, Your original post really says it. The commercial-style work is very different from the rest. I wasn't meaning my suggestion on the nudes to be a criticism of their quality. I agree that many are quite nice, and also original in their conception. I was just taking note of the wide difference between the commercial and the fine-art/playful ones.

The pseudonym suggestion was only meant to take care of the fact that you've apparently already used your real name for your overall portfolio, and since the rest of the work is so different, I thought that would be a way to allow you to keep your real name associated only with the commercial work (or v/v).

I am sympathetic to the idea of having a lot of variety in your portfolio, but commercial work, if you are striving to get paid for it, should probably be presented separately. After all, the nude work won't get you any commercial jobs, plus nude models will, for the most part, be uninterested in commercial work, while it is largely v/v for fashion models.

Speaking of putting a finger on things: I am now more able to pick out a quality in the commercial work that you may want to pay some attention to. In most of the commercial-style images, the expressions on the models' faces are very dead, as if they've been waiting around too long for you to snap the shutter. It could also be due to the model's personality, but it's your job as the director to bring something more interesting and engaging out of them.

Look at the difference between those (say in the first row) and the first one in the third row. The latter model looks alive, involved, and engaging, while too many of the others look very remote and emotionless. Directing models, and being spontaneous with them, takes a lot of practice, and a lot of psychology-in-action. That doesn't come easily to everyone, so that might be an area to work on as time goes along.

Just keep on shooting, and developing your talents and interests, and it will all come together for you.

Best of luck!

Thank you for the extensive critique. There definitely is a huge difference between the two types of photos I've been shooting. I'm much more into the "fun" category, although in its current state, it's still not nowhere near close enough to make me any money or attract better talent. I was hoping to attract better quality models by showcasing both my styles in the same portfolio. On the other hand I am told that most commercial models will not go anywhere near the styles I have for my nudes.

In regards to having my name associated with both styles - I actually don't see a huge problem with that from a privacy perspective. I assume you're advising me to split things up so my professional brand would be more clear/ clean?

That's a great point about the commercial models, and I haven't thought about it extensively until you brought it up. Thinking back, I've always let the commercial models "do their job". I snapped away but in a way was being lead along. Whereas in the fine art photos, I am much more in the driver's seat directing and communicating.

GSG Photography Studio wrote:
Great body of work! a few things I would change, I would get rid of the duplicate outfit shots, Keep the best of the set!
less is more, Next I would get rid of the shots with the feet cut off in photos, other than that you have an amazing EYE keep up the great work!

Thank you!

There's something that I've been wondering about, with regards to the advice for chopped off limbs. I still don't have much industry experience, so do correct me if I'm wrong. I was wondering if the chopped off limbs is something that only industry professionals and photographers pick up on. Once you find it, an awkward hand or a chopped off limb starts to distract from the picture. But it seems to me that the vast majority of people who consume photos would not be able to tell or even be bothered by it. Do you think this is a badge of honour amongst photographers? Or something that really does make a material impact on the final image delivered?

Of course, with that said, if the gate keepers of your industry notice the "lack of professionalism" in your pictures because of this, then that's a good reason to fix it

Quentin Studios wrote:
the vast majority of people who consume photos would not be able to tell or even be bothered by it. Do you think this is a badge of honour amongst photographers? Or something that really does make a material impact on the final image delivered?

The vast majority of the public can't tell you the qualitative differences between a shitty snapshot and a well-crafted image set side-by-side. Does that mean we should employ the shitty snapshot as the standard for our work?

Orca Bay Images wrote:

The vast majority of the public can't tell you the qualitative differences between a shitty snapshot and a well-crafted image set side-by-side. Does that mean we should employ the shitty snapshot as the standard for our work?

Well, if you’re selling something people no longer value, does it make sense to keep trying to force it down people’s throats?